Dmitry Turin wrote:
> Julian,
>
>>> JR> My experience is that most people do understand the difference between a
>>> JR> link and a button.
>>> JR> Also, the fact that it's possible to *obscure* that isn't a good
>>> JR> argument in favor of adding more stuff like this. On the contrary, we
>>> JR> should educate web designers that it's a bad thing to make something
>>> JR> look like a link when it isn't.
>>> I'm sure, that the best variant, when <a> behaves similar <form>.
>>> I'm sure.
>>> But this can require unification of HTTP for both cases.
>
> JR> Uh? Are you saying you want to make GET and POST be the same?
> Yes, definitively.
Sounds good. This saves a few bytes in the request line. Assuming you
want to get rid of all the other HTTP methods as well? Why keep PUT and
DELETE when GET is gone, after all?
Also we can remove most if not all of the caching semantics from HTTP,
which seems to confuse most people anyway.
> Moreover, I definitively want, that <a> and <form> send similar
> traffic (i.e. message of identical template).
> What's about bookmark in browsers, this is deal of browser
> instead of address-line in them.
User agents usually only bookmark the result of a GET request for a
reason; repeating a POST may cause an additional action the user doesn't
want (such as purchasing a book a second time).
> P.S.
> Moreover once again: I definitively want XML as communication protocol
> instead of HTTP.
XML is a format, not a protocol.
Maybe you could start with a problem statement first? What do you want
to achieve by using a different protocol?
Best regards, Julian